Peter Märkli and Florian Beigel in conversation
- Published: 30 November 2007 11:38
- Last Updated: 07 December 2007 09:32
- Reader Responses
In an extended version of the article that appeared in AJ 29.11.07, we provide excerpts from a conversation between Swiss architect Peter Märkli and his good friend, architect Florian Beigel, who is head of the Architecture Research Unit at London Metropolitan University. The conversation took place at The Zetter Restaurant, the morning after Märkli gave a lecture at Tate Modern, one in a series organised by the Architecture Foundation.
Florian Beigel: In your talk last night, you spoke about how the human being had to be at the centre of architecture. How do you teach this to students?
Peter Märkli: I don't know if you can teach it... If you have no background you can do beauty — but without a deeper context, which is the human being. You can't do a building for a building.
FB: When you say human being, I think you're saying a deeper understanding of the human condition?
PM: Yes, you have to have it. Otherwise you can't produce beauty, and beauty is radical. Beauty is not what you eat on a Sunday afternoon when you have some sweets; it is the most radical thing I know. I'm provoked, in a positive sense, if I see works that are beautiful.
FB: I like this radical beauty that looks at the everyday and a not-so beautiful condition.
PM: But we can't write a political pamphlet about beauty, we can only do a building. If you build a house with beauty, then people look at it and think life can be like that. I did all these houses in not very beautiful areas and people were provoked because the houses are strange, they speak about something other than egoism.
FB: I like this radical beauty that looks at the everyday, and looks at a not-so beautiful condition
PM: And so, in the art market, I'm not interested in a lot of works, because they speak out about the badness of the world.
FB: Last night, you often mentioned the 2,500 years of architectural history in Europe. People from other cultures might say, yes, but can you understand architecture that comes from another historical background? I think architecture can speak to different cultures, but how? Does the meeting of cultures happen through this idea of the human condition?
PM: That's one way, but not the only way. The other is through architectural grammar. The architectural grammar of the East is the same. I can read a mosque, that's not a problem.
FB: You can read a mosque, but can you read a Korean courtyard house?
PM: I think so, but my work and my education, my feelings – I am situated in the Occidental culture.
FB: But you're not limited to this, if you can speak outside…
PM: But that's normal; European culture has always been influenced by other cities because of transport. If they wanted to escape from Paris, they could go to Egypt. They made translations – they brought textiles to Persia. Then all the ornaments were Persian, but the textiles were French. Venice was influenced by Asia, but the structure of the houses was German because the builders came from the mainland.
FB: You used this word, 'translation', quite often in your talk last night, and I was left wondering, what is involved in this 'translation'. Is it a kind of abstraction?
PM: I think translation begins when you look intensely at something and you are impressed by it. At first, you're very dependent on it. That is why we have some architects who only make copies. With work and an understanding of the materials and so on, you become freer. You learn to say that thing in another way and it becomes your own; then it looks fresh and new. I know wonderful houses built on posts in the Philippines, but I won't build a house like that.
FB: Today, we have many specialisations of the profession of architecture. You are what I would call an architect's architect. But someone in an article called you a 'baukünstler' ('building-artist'). Do you like this description?
PM: Not of my person, but I think of architecture, in German, as 'baukunst'
FB: As 'building-art'?
PM: It's much too wide a description, but all I want to do is 'baukunst', otherwise I'm not interested. That's clear. 'Baukunst' means you can make a very small building with a very low budget. You can't do that if you only know how to make a palace. And 'baukunst' was for a long time the highest of all arts. Not painting, or sculpture, but architecture. But now, you can declare anything as painting, anything as sculpture, because it is not so important for life, because the car is much more important than beauty. I want to 'regain' a bit from that.
FB: In your study of the language of architecture, this word 'figure' is so prominent. You speak about the 'urban figure' the 'round figure', the 'space figure' – Does this mean you want to be less abstract and more figurative? What does it mean?
PM: It is perhaps the difference between English and German. I think that we have a lot of good words in German. For example in English, you do not have the word 'gestalt' –
FB: 'Gestalt' ('city-body') and 'figure', are they similar?
PM: Gestalt is the composing of architectural elements into a whole, and figure, perhaps, is more the volumetric space. I say 'figure' in English maybe because I don't know the language.
FB: Yes, but you say it in German too.
PM: But mostly I'm speaking about morphology.
FB: With the Novartis building you made quite a big effort to integrate art into the project. I think Jenny Holzer's piece is very well integrated because it's about figures as well—the letters are figures walking along the building. It's not just art on the building; it's much better integrated.
PM: Yes, in this big space the ornamental geometry was too light; you needed a strong work, because the building was not so high or big. Otherwise I don't know what I would have done with the façade. It was once a possibility for me to work with other pieces, but I think with these letters the façade is changing, sometimes it's very fine, sometimes very intense. For me, it's not a decoration; it's the possibility that this building, in the masterplan or in the city, will take place there.
FB: It takes place – taking the place?
PM: Taking the place without being a spectacle. Sometimes if the letters are thick, it's heavy. And then sometimes the façade is very fine, with the letters becoming very thin. And because the LEDs are white, sometimes you can't see it in the shining bright white of the day. That's very important for me, because it's not a Coca Cola ad.
